Speaker: Copyright Must Change
2201 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 13 14 15 16 17 … 89 Newer→ Last
-
Anybody watch "A Lion's Trail" on the Sky documentary channel tonight?
That song was part of my growing up. I loved & love it.
The doco was an EXCELLECENT example of how copyright is frequently stolen/controlled by INDIVIDUALS before being contracted to big companies.
The doco after, on Ralph, is pseudo- mystique,rambling, & while the music has some of my friends - now dead- playing it, and Cilla reading
her ephemeral poetry, and some *really* bad music in it, it makes a less impact than the first *minute* of Solomon Lente's song- -
Next, is "Snail: The Movie" - which will be fun. Know a lot of the folk involved and have an ancient augusta shell- I'll keep it desktop while watching how it's rellies may be slaughtered. Sweet dreams, everyone-
-
Whoa! Total propaganda! And, given the size of my p.paraphanta & their's. I think there is some - adjusting going on-
this turned out to be a Solid Energy propaganda exercise.
Any comment out there? -
I was just checking out what was being given an airing on Kim Hill's Saturday morning National Radio show. There was a re-run of an interview with Scoop founder Alastair Thompson that has interesting intro regarding the media.
-
Just found Public Address Radio's interview regarding intellectual property via the free beer initiative. It's worth the couple of minutes it takes to listen, raising the movement towards reclaiming rights for society type view.
-
Pat Pilcher has another story in today's Herald titled "Are dicey stats leading copyright lawmakers down the garden path?"
-
3410,
Pat Pilcher has another story in today's Herald titled "Are dicey stats leading copyright lawmakers down the garden path?"
A decent article, overall, with one of the key points in this issue making a rare appearance in the trad. media. Unfortunately, he again misuses that word, and, incredibly, even worse than last time. Sigh.
I still maintain that we can't build a discussion on such shoddy foundations, but in the spirit of trying to get somewhere ...
How copyright extension in sound recordings actually works:
(via boing boing) -
How copyright extension in sound recordings actually works:
its very black and white.
what about artists who control their own works?
They don't take that into account when building a case against copyright extension based on evil record labels getting 90%Why don't they say reject extensions to record label owned property, or why no be more specific, oppose extensions to major record labels.
in an effort to build a case to hurt the big boys they're putting forward a case that will hurt the small players too, the one's they're saying they're acting in the interests of.
I'd like to see a figure that says how much media is independently owned too. they say 99% of income will go to major label and major artist stuff. 90% of my music collection which is pretty huge is indie artists and labels. all my friends and associates have similar collections.is all very well to attack industry dodgy stats but pulling in your own doesn't make the case any stronger.
-
I was having a look at the Zimbabwe Herald, (an organisation which claims Robert Mugabe retains the mandate to lead the government) and stumbled across the following article about CD ownership at what I assume is the National Broadcaster, which I post as a contrast to the discussion here, which seems frequently to focus on music ownership.
-
what about artists who control their own works?
They don't take that into account when building a case against copyright extension based on evil record labels getting 90%That's easy, up until the indie label boom, post punk, virtually no recorded music was owned by the artists. That date doesn't come up, under the current law, for expiration into the public domain, until at least 2030. Even, after that date, until this decade, most music has been made, and is recorded by, major labels (well into the 90% figure) and most acts who recorded for majors remain thoroughly unrecouped so 100% of what is returned from those masters go to major labels. When you also take into account the fact that much of the indie output globally of the past thirty years, at least the stuff that sold any quantity, has been bought or somehow acquired by majors, that 90% figure is easily an under estimate.
-
Simon - any comment to make on Gray Bartlett link you posted?
-
I didn't post it, Jon, it was Bradley Peak. But my opinion has changed little since I wrote this.
-
Thanks Simon... my apologies it was Bradley. If Gray's made good living doing what he is doing, I don't understand why he needs a subsidy to do it.
-
that 90% figure is easily an under estimate.
what o you reckon the figure is for nz, a country where majors tayed away from a large portion of the local output.
Also noting in the flying nun case where a major acquired the label, early recordings were not done on contract with the indie label so ownership of the label doesn't necessarily mean a major owns all the catalogue at all.
other labels to consider are the pagan catalogue (not sure if trevor owns this or not) propeller, that catalogue you linked to the other day where I'm pretty sure the entire catalogue is independently owned an managed, wildside, and various smaller label operators like salmonella dub who own all their stuff, FFD, who do likewise etc.
many if not most local recordings were funded independently so that means he who pays owns,if you take local content as every recording made in nz regardless of how unheard or crap that recoding is, how much of that ownership would remain with the artists or their indie labels?
-
without lazy key typos
what do you reckon the figure is for nz, a country where majors stayed away from a large portion of the local output?
-
in today's press
thousands of nz artists have signed a petition protesting against new legislation to battle illegal downloading.
That's a very misleading opening statement and misrepresenting the actual intent of many of those artists.
they signed a petition to protest the guilty without proof part of that as stated later by their representative artist guy. -
what o you reckon the figure is for nz, a country where majors stayed away from a large portion of the local output.
Sure it's higher, but most of the key stuff before about 2000 is owned by labels not the acts.
And much of Pagan's output is owned by Sony & EMI now. With FN, Roger said most of that was pretty clear these days and was owned by FN / Warners or at least leased very long term.
But bear in mind that copyright extension story relates only to the EU.
-
Sure it's higher,
have got an estimated figure on all master tapes produced in all studios (home or otherwise) in nz and the % that are owned by major labels?
I'm going to go for 70% artist or indie owned, possibly more based on my work in archiving local music. I very rarely come across any recordings that were funded by a major.much of nz's output was own funded. I remember murray cammick and graeme brazier having a loud argument over ownership of the last wild side release of graeme's album. I think murray paid for it all himself and graeme was saying how he was going to sell his house tp buy the tapes and murray would be sorry. I don't know how much of wildside's output had external money in it. Apparently not the graeme brazier one.
And much of Pagan's output is owned by Sony & EMI now.
by owned do you mean licensed through or purchased outright, ie that sony emi have bought the masters and now have sole control over the recordings and all the filthy money they can make from them?
I know he sold bic runga's early recordings to them but there's a lot of other stuff he's run through the label, did they buy all that?The only 2 cases where I was trying to salvage masters owned by a major was the flying nun stuff and there were questions raised about whether flying nun had the right to sell the masters to anyone as they were recorded and funded by that acts at the time and no ownership had been transferred. These are early recordings from before the mid 80's
I also do a lot of work in recording studios and know that a lot of recording never sees nationwide release. The person paying the bills for the recordings is almost always the artist making them the owner of the masters and the copyright holder.
The boing boing clip referred to 99% of income being major label/major artist.
I'm saying that yes indeed 99% of known income probably does go through majors but that is not 99% of all income nore 99% of all mastertapes, The unknown incomes are predominantly independent in nature (do indies declare their sales figures to anyone other than the tax man? I know I don't, and self release bands certainly wouldn't). I also represent a catalogue of over 1500 recorded works (individual songs). none of these are controlled by a major label.It would be a doable exercise to estimate the number of NZ works controlled by majors as there is a comprehensive list of nz released recordings, can't remember the name of the book but I'm sure you've seen it.
Sure there's the peking man, exponents, dobbyn, recordings etc etc, but there's a swag load of un represented stuff too.
Those masters are also affected by copyright law and are not benefiting evil majors (or anyone else mostly as they sit in peoples garages gathering dust)
can't remember but I think you told me that you resisted attempts to buy your catalogue so that's another archive of material not owned or accountable to majors. -
have you got an estimated
-
I know he sold bic runga's early recordings to them but there's a lot of other stuff he's run through the label, did they buy all that?
Bic, Strawpeople, Shona = Sony
Greg J, Pluto = EMI
Shihad = Warners
I realise that vast amounts of stuff sits owned by acts but mostly it remains unreleased or of minimal interest to the buying public, hence it has little financial value (cultural is another whole thing). But as I said in my first post, the percentage increased dramatically in the post punk years, after 1980.
But much of it is still owned by labels, not acts.
The FN thing is interesting as it's also a common afliction, where labels think that because they released something, they have some sort of ownership. I think the ownership is jointly, in lieu of paperwork, defined by who paid for it and / or who commissioned it.
There is a mass claimed by majors that clearly fits neither of those. I suspect FN was a lot like that but I think there has been much tidying up. I'm sure the same applies to the likes of Rough Trade.
I control the early Suburban Reptiles stuff because I paid for it and the band recorded it at dates I booked. Phonogram released it but that didn't give them ownership.
-
I control the early Suburban Reptiles stuff because I paid for it and the band recorded it at dates I booked. Phonogram released it but that didn't give them ownership.
in nz, (my point of perspective) there are a lot of stories like that, quite simply because the act of getting a major to fork out for anything was kinda laughable, being tight arse disinterested bastards and all.
What about the mee mees / blams stuff, didn't you go into hock for that? I assume you booked and paid for it.Toylove's masters were sold for $1 between majors at one time or so the story goes.
-
What about the mee mees / blams stuff, didn't you go into hock for that? I assume you booked and paid for it.
yep, although some of the 'hock' was covered by gigs in the case of the Blams.
-
pagan/antenna record artists
greg johnson
voom
darcy clay
eye tv/nixons
sam hunt
tadpole
billy tk
ted brown
waratahs
sth side of bombay
merenia
al hunter
Hallelujah Picassos
The Parker Project
Death Ray Café
Smokeshop
Rikki Morris
Tex Pistol
Holidaymakers
Rhythm Cage
This Boy Rob
Chrome Safari
Johnny Bongo and Debbie Harwood
Cheek Ta Cheek
Jim’n’Jo
Obscure Desire
Ardijah
Ray Columbus
The Rapture
Billy T James
1006Wentworth Brewster & Co
Prince Tui Teka
Scotty And Comost of his catalogue wasn't shihad/bic/pluto/straw peple
interestingly there is now a
pagan records pimping metal somewhere in europe who obviously didn't have access to the internet and google when they chose their name. -
most of his catalogue wasn't shihad/bic/pluto/straw peple
+ Shona / Greg: most of what sold was. Warratahs being to obvious exception.
Half those things you mention were one off singles, and the bulk of the rest was label owned and paid for. Not much owned by the acts themselves.
-
Rumour has it that this morning's power cut across Wellington was caused be an ARPA notice being issued to the local power supplier. This in response to claims of excessive file sharing and pirating in the Wellington region.
Apparently it was more convenient for them to issue a notice to a single power supplier than have to deal with multiple ISPs. The way the Copyright Act is written the definition of an ISP, hence the notice being issued in this way.
"Power companies have an obligation to ensure users of their services are complying with the law. We are simply protecting the interests of New Zealand artists and musicians" claimed an ARPA spokesperson today.
Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it?
Post your response…
This topic is closed.